Talk:Fibonacci n-step number sequences: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
m (→‎octonacci vs. octanacci: OEIS editors ruling. -- ~~~~)
Line 14: Line 14:


::: Yeah, in my REXX calculator, I accept both names. OEIS uses octanacci (with a misspelled ''octoancci'' reference that points to the ''octanacci'' sequence), and Wolfram Mathworld ™ doesn't mention either one. It's like the word ''hexadecimal'' --- it's wrong (mixing Greek with Latin), but it's too late to change it now. The common usage is so ingrained that everybody uses it and knows what it means. I suspect it will be with '''octo''' & '''octa'''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
::: Yeah, in my REXX calculator, I accept both names. OEIS uses octanacci (with a misspelled ''octoancci'' reference that points to the ''octanacci'' sequence), and Wolfram Mathworld ™ doesn't mention either one. It's like the word ''hexadecimal'' --- it's wrong (mixing Greek with Latin), but it's too late to change it now. The common usage is so ingrained that everybody uses it and knows what it means. I suspect it will be with '''octo''' & '''octa'''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

:::: This just in ... the OEIS editors corrected the "misspelled/inconsistant" word (if only to be consistant with the other uses of the ''octanacci'' words, but they mentioned that both terms appear to be correct. That's good enough for me. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


==undecanacci numbers==
==undecanacci numbers==

Revision as of 19:14, 25 May 2012

Lucas sequence redirect

I can't remember how to do a redirect. Could someone create and redirect Lucas sequence to this task, thanks. --Paddy3118 05:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Got it for you. --Mwn3d 13:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Ta! --Paddy3118 18:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

octonacci vs. octanacci

(spelling). The term octonacci seems to be a misspelling. It should be octanacci. The misspelling in the OEIS database entry A104415 is (most likely) being changed as I typeth (as it was just edited for correction by me). -- Gerard Schildberger 17:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Gerard, I read it the other way round. From greek prefixes, if we have tri-pod and octo-pod and we have tribonacci and not tribanacci, then surely we need octonacci as well. Google fight shows that there is some confusion but even here, the octonacci term seems to 'win'. --Paddy3118 18:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't sweat it. This reference shows both oct, octa and octo in use!? --Paddy3118 18:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, in my REXX calculator, I accept both names. OEIS uses octanacci (with a misspelled octoancci reference that points to the octanacci sequence), and Wolfram Mathworld ™ doesn't mention either one. It's like the word hexadecimal --- it's wrong (mixing Greek with Latin), but it's too late to change it now. The common usage is so ingrained that everybody uses it and knows what it means. I suspect it will be with octo & octa. -- Gerard Schildberger 19:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
This just in ... the OEIS editors corrected the "misspelled/inconsistant" word (if only to be consistant with the other uses of the octanacci words, but they mentioned that both terms appear to be correct. That's good enough for me. -- Gerard Schildberger 19:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

undecanacci numbers

this is the name of Fibonacci 11-step numbers. -- Gerard Schildberger 17:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

dodecanacci numbers

this is the name of Fibonacci 12-step numbers. -- Gerard Schildberger 17:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)